Bet365 pull out of longstanding sponsorships

GC and Rach from Accounts is still the best combo.

Throwing their toys out the pram.

doing the right thing

There's always the Tik Tock Cheltenham Gold Cup to look forward to, followed by the Only Fanz Grand National for the new generations to enjoy.

Tax on horse racing bets were unchanged in the budget.  Suggests Denise might not be being entirely honest

365 obviously doesn't need horse racing. Racing basically said to the gvnt, ffeck the bookies, but look after us. Bookies say we'll show you what might happen when you bite the hand that feeds.
Racing paying the price for overly relying on bookies for sponsorships anyway. When they need one to sponsor the derby, you know you're in trouble.

If the government had increased GPT on horse racing how exactly would that help the bookies?

It wouldn't. But obviously the bookies would expect some loyalty for what they put in (as they would see it). Since the loyalty disappeared, they are reducing the input.

I'm not saying I agree with it or not, but why would they continue with something that's net negative when it's not appreciated. We've all experienced doing something for someone and it's not appreciated. You tend to want to want to stop doing it.

I'm not a horse racing punter, only very occasionally have a bet, but I agree with the government.  Horse racing, and therefore gambling on it is culturally significant. It's part of what makes Britain, Britain.

Culturally we used to be free as well. If you chose to do something that was harmful to yourself, well that's your choice to make. Now the government wants to intervene and interfere with most elements of your life.

That's what I was alluding to Cider.  365 possibly acting like a jilted lover with a hint of spite in the decision.

I'm with you on free choice and nanny state.  Governments should be providing information to help people make more informed decisions, not making the decisions for them

It's the inevitable. 365 to horse racing is effectively a charity. How can it defend funding racing at the same level, when racing was palpably disloyal.

As I myself allude to, racing made the bed, becoming so reliant on bookies effective philanthropy. Not it has to live in it.

Racing is in managed decline. If they can't get proper corporate sponsorship for flagship events, and need to rely on bookie generosity, it's only going to go one way. Eventually the bookies will all be owned by people that don't have any attachment to/love for horse racing.

Horse Racing functions very well in France and the USA, that has Tote only, so as a product it doesn't need traditional UK bookies

Their only chance imv to halt the decline is to get someone in at the top who could convince the corporates like Whitbread and Hennessy to come back. Maybe it's already impossible.

I don't know about the US, apparently nobody attends a racecourse in France. To regular meetings. For me the product remains superb. It needs a haircut at the bottom end, too many crappy horses, crappy races and gaff tracks. But there's no will to do that either.

Next week we'll still see something that can't be replicated anywhere else in the world. Though, they are doing their very best to ffek that up too!

So does Hong Kong for that matter, where it's mega and online casino betting is illegal

There's nothing culturally significant or sociable about betting on Big Bass Bonanza.

I'm not dismissing it completely but it's not the heart of the problem. You'd be able to bet even less, the government would know your business, and there is very little desire to bet into a pool at unknown prices in the British betting community. They should do much more to make pool betting more appealing though.

365 are obv all remote, so get hit more than clowns like WH, who decided to close shops because of the increase, when the tax situation for these shops hadn't changed at all.

If I was HMRC I'd be far more worried about Denise getting huffy and upping sticks to Monaco or Dub.... okay just Monaco.

No reason why online casino betting can't be outlawed in the UK like in Hong Kong.

There's about 10,000 thoroughbreds in France compared to about 15,000 in the UK.

It doesn't need to be banned, just stake limited.

Looking at todays cards betmgm and unibet still sponsoring plenty and certainly the latter have no interest in taking horse race bets, so the model - brand recognition leading to casino play- must still work.

in their opinion

That's why we need exit taxes like Norway dave. 

It's not as simple as this but if you are a US citizen and you work abroad you are still liable for US taxes.  That's not the case in the UK, where you are deemed non resident

If you have student debt and you move abroard you are liable for loan repayments.

If people leaving the country to avoid tax is an issue, you change the law.

lol

How much tax do you reckon DC has personally paid?

Talking of biting the hand that feeds, and lack of appreciation....

pool betting is an inferior product, made less appealing by caw

attendances in the u.s aside from the obvious are pitiful, as in france but its doesnt matter as the pmu pays for everything. those who quote low entry costs are missing the point

online betting on exchanges may be illegal in hong kong but it sure does exist. even the tentacles of the ccp havent managed to kill it, and they are good at that sort of thing. unless, of course, they are complicit

there are many justified criticisms of bookmakers but they are operating in a competitive market and this govt. has only made things difficult and suffocating for small operators, the sort they should encourage

but they have no clue about running a business and too many dont like it at all. they view business as a problem because they dont get it and have never had a proper job running one. trade unions and councils who are monopoly suppliers demanding compulsory payment are all they know, with predictable result

How much tax you have paid should be a matter of public record but it it isn't.

Denise Coates and Fred are possibly the highest tax payers in the country.  Good on them.

Kirsten Rausing and her brother are worth over £12bn.  I'd be more interested in how much tax she has paid.  I suspect it's a good deal less than Denise and Fred

Pool betting with a takeout of 5% would actually be a super product for the average punter, but that will never happen.

Pool betting is an inferior product.  Just saying horse racing doesn't need traditional UK pricing.  It's not dependent on it for it's existence.

impossible to run a pool with 5%

the lowest ive seen is 12

relieve bookmakers of their ridiculous costs and margins might improve but atm they are only going one way. and as in business generally, costs are rocketing so its hard to blame them

Cider is right about bookies retaliating for the perceived disloyalty of racing but don't be surprised if the Treasury feels they were lied to by bookies about protecting racing. Fool me once, etc.

And while Flutter and Entain have been relying on US expansion, the new American pseudo-exchanges, Kalshi and Polymarket, have left them in the dust by offering markets on anything that moves and not giving a damn about insider trading. Their trick is persuading the government they are Wall Street-like derivatives markets and not betting.

I'm sure Freddie like many others must now be thinking about pulling the sponsorship plug particularly at some courses you know which ones I probably mean he should show them who the daddy is. Just my thoughts the taxation of gambling changes wasn't the best thought through in hindsight was it where is head in hands man and the GC must cost a few quid too. Kempton last night was a joke last time I ever bet a bean there.

Anyone with an issue logging in? 1st for me in over 2 decades.

impossible123 -- Just logged into Bet365 ok. The home page looks a bit busier than I remember it.

When sites have been redesigned, it sometimes pays to clear your browser cache.

365 doesn't like vpns (if you're using one)

Please don't confuse implausible,Cider

B365 used to offer 1/4 the odds all races at Cheltenham and the 4/1 offer.  Doesn't feel it was that long ago, but I'm sure it was canned before the latest tax rises.  Nearly every bookie would've been 1/4 1-2-3 on the Supreme and many bookies better than that.

If the government puts up taxes and increases your workload with compliance it's the punters that lose out.  Nothing new there, but always found it an oxymoron that affordability checks make gambling less affordable.  They should really give affordability checks a different name.

Nobody should be telling anybody how to spend their money end of.